A setting question

[Snowfire]

DD will be starting yr 7 at our local comp in September. She's done well in her sats, a level 5 for all aspects of English as well as science and a good 4 for maths. She has really been looking forward to getting properly stuck into science having done a science G&T workshop at the comp earlier this term and she has always wanted to be a scientist since she was tiny. I thought having gained a level 5 she would be likely to be in the top set for science but having spoken to several people with children already at the school they are put in the same set for science as they are in for maths meaning she is only likely to be in a middle set for maths and science. Is this the usual way of doing things? DD's friend who is a maths wizz got a 5 for maths but 4 for science but by this reckoning she'll be top set for science.
Also, could being in a lower set affect her chance to do the triple award for GCSE?

They are doing the test to ensure a "comprehensive" intake. The other comprehensive schools in central London select on the basis of faith or distance which to my mind are more "selective".

So every single year 6 in Lewisham sits an exam and is allocated a school place accordingly?

Yes
You nominate what schools you want to go to as normal, but then the schools are limited to how many they take from each band.

The London comp one of mine goes to takes equal numbers from four quartile bands, administered independently, and then by distance for each band. All good schools are oversubscribed but the school gets no choice over who they take, and they have over 30% on FSMs, so the argument about MC postcodes is somewhat limited. About a third do not transfer to sixth form, which needs five Bs and As in some options. That means two thirds of the full ability spectrum makes those respectable grades. Sixth form FSM level is similar, the intake doubles for sixth form. It's a real question to me why this can't happen across the country.

At DD's school they have 60 places for triple science and they take the top 60 based on ability and offer them triple science if they want to do it - with the remaining places going on the next children who request it.

I'm not keen on this ability banding genug. It is unheard of up here and i knew nothing of it until my neice was refused a place at her preferred london comp because she basically was too bright - the 25% allocated to the top band meant that although she was closer to the school she was refused a place unlike some of her friends at primary who were in middle or bottom band and were offered a place. How can that be considered fair?

Brian Cox got a D in A-Level maths.

Supposedly local comp sets by English sets which in turn are determined from CATs. Distant Comp1 sets only for math which is determined...er, I haven't a clue how. Even though DS starts there in September. (Sigh)

Yes Loshad doesn't every person whose DC fails to get a place dislike it? It is fair because the intake is comprehensive, so the overriding factor is equal access for every band of ability range.

Some so-called "comps" take 10% or so by ability, and locality may skew the ability of the intake. The locality has much poverty so all families have equal chance of getting in. Parents are told you cannot tutor for a place - you compete on distance per quartile. You can't get in by coaching and buying property nearby will give you no better chance than the council tenants bang up against the school. Perfectly fair.

If they can get two thirds of ability five Bs as well as sixth form entry requirements, the real question is why aren't other schools with less than 30% FSMs in better neighbourhoods delivering?

Brian Cox is a lot younger than I am, but in my day there were at least two who entered medical school with a D each in a science subject. Possibly Brian's D in A level Maths was part of the standard offer for the course he was doing, when he applied?

genug, I find it very hard to believe people were offered places at med school with a D unless you are well past retirement age. The standard offer in my day was BBB, occasional candidates were accepted with BBC.
It's not my kid who didn't get in, i still find it a weird system, i teach in a true comprehensive, we get excellent results, without the need to a) examine kids before entry, and b) refuse entry to kids who live close to the school because of some pattern of intelligence. Sometimes we have brighter years than others, that's fine because the kids get in on postcode. How bizarre that some years a kid that lives in a certain road would get a place, then the following year their neighbour who is of identical "intelligence" fails to do so on banding

I am very old and even in my day nobody would have got into med school with a D. Not even into Hull. Oxbridge possibly.........

Where DD's school is, the more affluent neighbourhoods are closer to the school and the large council estates are further away. If the places were allocated on distance alone, the more affluent would benefit. The advantage of being in a particular band varies from year to year and really depends on the number of siblings. However Seeker etc are right to be suspicious - the banding test was originally introduced by the current Head when he took it over as a sink school 10 years ago, when it was shunned by the middle classes, in order to get some academic kids. It has completely turned around. Now the pendulum is swinging the other way.

Generally I think in this particular area there is a definite advantage to being put into the top band. A lot of independent school applicants sit for the school as insurance and as they are prepared for the entrance tests (Verbal Reasoning), they are more likely to be allocated places in the top band which are then turned down. In the year before my DD applied the top band offered up to 2 miles in distance, whereas the bottom band was under a mile.

I sat on an appeals panel for another school in the Borough this year and the top and bottom bands had a definite advantage to the middle bands which contained most of the appellants and who were denied places on distance. It does vary year on year.

I may be eligible for retirement, but in my line of work it is common for effectiveness to overrule age. The standard offer for medicine was CCC in my day. However they obviously liked these two because they both applied post results with a combination of grades including a D each, so they met the average of CCC and were thought to be suitable medic material. Correctly so. Dentistry and Vet Sci offers were tougher of course, at BCC. So you may find it hard to believe, Loshad, and seeker they trained at two different London hospitals, so neither Hull nor Oxbridge, and are now both outstanding consultants in their fields, so draw your own conclusions on A level grades between my and your time.

How could you possibly know yours is a true comp unless by chance you happened to get a distribution of ability that spanned the entire spectrum? The fact that the cohorts vary proves you do not have a true comp. Nothing bizarre at all, except to the inexperienced, about testing to ensure that effectively you have four entry routes to ensure true comprehensiveness of intake, and not varying cohorts.

Of course this only works with massive over subscription across all abilities. If you serve an area where you are not in that situation then surely it must be easier to deliver better outcomes than a true comp that has substantial FSM? There seems considerable merit when it is near impossible to predict any cohort's combination of ability and distance, and therefore no point tutoring or moving.

Glanug you really do talk rubbish. We are oversubscribed, but cohorts will and do vary - demonstrates your limited understanding of statistics and their limitations.
It is one of the reasons the exams boards moved to the current system because back in my day ( and possibly yours even more years ago) there was an acceptance that cohorts varied and so it could be easier to gain an A grade some years rather than others.

You obviously don't know what " comprehensive" means when it refers to a school.........

And yes, BBC or BBB were reasonable offers in my day too. In the days when 2% went to University. No Ds for medicine, though!

Loshad you are clearly ignorant and despite your limited experience, unable to process new information. My understanding of stats is fine, as is the CEM's, Yours does not need to test, or chooses not to test for ability.

As for the separate matter of exam grading, admissions tutors are better judges of what is required, and your BBB was worth my CCC, and a lot more than today's A A A* plus the plethora of other admissions tests.

As would not work for people who are clearly not suited for medicine, seeker!

Comp means exactly comprehensive ability, not selection by postcode, which is what you mean.

I agree. But you now have to have As and be suited to medicine!

Interestingly, I would describe the comp DD will be going to (remember? the one with dubious setting for science?) as a true comprehensive. The intake is from a large area including part of a city (albeit a small one) and a large rural area including some areas of social and financial deprivation and some very exclusive coastal villages. The school has an ARB for severe SEN, it also has a good number of high achievers and a lot of DC in between. We are lucky in that we don't have much competition for school places so can pretty much choose where to go.

I would describe my DD1's school as an average comp. Intake by siblings then distance, intially a mile radius. On the edge of an affluent area, picking up slightly more from the neighbouring less affluent LA. Around 55% 5 A*-C including E&M.

Each year group split into two sides, with sets 1 to 4 in each.
So in practice, top sets are around 25% of year group, and would contain a few A*/A, many A/B and a few B/C pupils.

Set for English & Maths form 2nd term in yr7.
Set for science from yr8.
All top sets science 'expected' to take triple GCSE, but as it's an option can opt for double to have an extra option. Expected to be level 6a in Science and Maths, and at least 5a in English (end of yr9) to take triple. In practuce a few in set 2 get to take triple too.

Dd's school has at least 6 sets for each subject. You could have a child who is in set 1 for English and maybe set 5 for maths or vice versa. It is a normal high school which used to be called comprehensive school way back but now actually has just changed to an Academy with no change whatsoever. Intake is done without any tests taken. It has no catchment area either but is always oversubscribed. Dd falls in another school catchment area but that was one she didn't want to go to so put down another school for first choice and her current school was second choice but got in which turned out to be fine.

Seeker Dd says thank you for your nice comment about her being exceptional. To be honest seeker, I don't really know what comprehensive means. When I was at school it was a girls Secondary school which then mixed (yuk) and became a high school.

The banding thing was first used in academies and then rolled out. As previous posters have said, it is supposedly to get a varied intake. I don't have an opinion on it really.

I teach at an excellent comprehensive school (higher results than those mentioned in the thread) and I have never given a level 7 in Year 7. (English) The student might be a level 7 in some aspects of writing or reading but it is highly unusual for a student to be at that level for enough assessment foci to make them a 7 overall.

My nieces are in their 20s and the banding was used when they went to secondary,so over 10 years ago before academies I would have thought.

Apparently banding was bought in by the Inner London Education authority in the 80s, and was kept by a small number of boroughs after that ie Lewisham, Hackney, Greenwich and Tower Hamlets.

Of the 5 secondary schools in my Borough, 3 use banding. One that doesn't is the academy ironically, but they use a fairly complicated system of church and foundation (distance) places and random allocation (lottery).

Three of the schools also select 10% on aptitude. 2 on music and 1 on art.